Tags:
Permalink Reply by wilsond on January 15, 2010 at 8:59pm
Permalink Reply by Dave DeGraw on January 15, 2010 at 9:24pm I've actually met both Scott Brown and Martha Coakley. They're both nice, as you would expect. Brown was indeed very cordial, even knowing that I didn't agree with him on politics.
He may well be personally decent: A JAG, National Guardsman and good father. But his views are neither decent nor prudent. To wit:
a.) He has defended torture, using the Orwellian code words "enhanced interrogation techniques." This is not decent.
b.) He has a tortured explanation for why he would not support covering 30 million new people with health care. I submit that this displays a lack of compassion.
c.) His view on gay marriage is frankly cowardly. That's not decent. Supporting Tom's and others' right to marry is decent.
d.) He denies global warming is real. That is very definitely not prudent.
Down the line, on almost every issue, he's a continuation of the last 8 years of rule under President Bush. I respectfully submit that that is definitely not prudent.
Thanks for reading this far, if you have ...
Well.... anybody care to comment? I am getting hammered by my gay friends.
Hi Elaine,
I already checked out Scott's listing on the marriage section of his page.
Below is one of several e-mail responses from a gay, musician friend from years ago.
I'd be curious to hear a response from someone even though I will likely stay pro-Brown.
Thanks for your time.
, and respectfully disagree with Mark. Brown is pro-torture, anti-gay rights, and has openly questioned Coakley's patriotism on national TV -- not behavior that I consider at all "overwhelmingly decent." He has no ideas other than those that have already failed us in the past. He would be a disaster in the US Senate.
Hi Elaine,
I already checked out Scott's listing on the marriage section of his page.
Below is one of several e-mail responses from a gay, musician friend from years ago.
I'd be curious to hear a response from someone even though I will likely stay pro-Brown.
Thanks for your time.
, and respectfully disagree with Mark. Brown is pro-torture, anti-gay rights, and has openly questioned Coakley's patriotism on national TV -- not behavior that I consider at all "overwhelmingly decent." He has no ideas other than those that have already failed us in the past. He would be a disaster in the US Senate.
Hi Elaine,
I already checked out Scott's listing on the marriage section of his page.
Below is one of several e-mail responses from a gay, musician friend from years ago.
I'd be curious to hear a response from someone even though I will likely stay pro-Brown.
Thanks for your time.
, and respectfully disagree with Mark. Brown is pro-torture, anti-gay rights, and has openly questioned Coakley's patriotism on national TV -- not behavior that I consider at all "overwhelmingly decent." He has no ideas other than those that have already failed us in the past. He would be a disaster in the US Senate.
I guess you have not seen Coakly's attack Ads,I'll take the patriotism of someone who served in the military before a career politicianHi Elaine,
I already checked out Scott's listing on the marriage section of his page. Below is one of several e-mail responses from a gay, musician friend from years ago. I'd be curious to hear a response from someone even though I will likely stay pro-Brown.
Thanks for your time.
, and respectfully disagree with Mark. Brown is pro-torture, anti-gay rights, and has openly questioned Coakley's patriotism on national TV -- not behavior that I consider at all "overwhelmingly decent." He has no ideas other than those that have already failed us in the past. He would be a disaster in the US Senate.
Permalink Reply by Chris Parker on January 15, 2010 at 11:00pm Frankly, regardless of his public position there's not much being done by either party regarding the issue. Generally speaking gay rights is an issue Dems like to flag around verbally for milage with the gay vote but, in fact, there's little in terms of positive substance given. Tell your friend he might consider these points; Obama's official position is that marriage exists between a man and a woman and he is on record saying so. After a showing of gay demonstraters showed up in DC he indicated he would be making changes they'd like to see but not until after the elections, wink, wink. Well, I think he's getting to be pretty famous for lip service with little delivery. Let's not forget Clinton's big consolation prize to gays in the form of "don't ask don't tell" which caused more trouble than if he'd done nothing. Essentially, it's liberal judges legislating from the bench that have made the most progress. Sometimes one has to consider the issues beyond the one that is most important to them and look at the totality of the package. Gay marriage is an important issue to many, but the issues of personal autonomy, economy, and national security are more important at this particular point in time. JMO not meant to be confontational.
Permalink Reply by Mark C. Nemeskal on January 16, 2010 at 12:19am Is Nemeskal still on here? Sure he has freedom of speech. I thought he meant it when he said, "I'm done with you and the Brown Brigade."
If you want to spend your time discussing a no-win issue with a troll, by all means , go ahead. This is still pretty much a free country and the First Amendment applies to all regardless of sexual orientation.
The rest of us are back to work to help elect Scott Brown. I think I've already made my point that Girard (sp?) has guts and that I have gay friends of whom I think the world.
Back to work. Focus, focus, focus, phone calls and blogs/posts.
A troll keeps coming back and back and back, so we really can't believe this one when he said, "I'm done with you and the Brown Brigade."
I'm now leaving to go back to work for Scott Brown over issues like terrorism, quit the overspending of OUR money, and sink Obamacide.
Have any of seniors you know who have run into the new rules like a consulting doctor will only be paid for an admission instead of a consult? I've read parts of both monstrosities of the House and Senate. National healthcare is a wonderful vision. I'm for it, but not at this cost, under these rules. After the rest of the Mayo Clinics withdraw, how many doctors are going to retire early?
How many current services are going to quit being offered? because Medicare won't pay for them without too much hassle or pay a pittance? You think women on Medicare should only be given mammograms and Pap smears once every five years? Vote for Coakley by all means.
That means leave here and go there and find out her views and blog on her site. Scott's views are posted on his campaign site, take them or leave them. He says what he means and means what he says. While a financial conservative, he is more moderate and leans towards personal freedoms. In some instances like the defense of marriage act, Obama agrees with Scott.
Surely, if you want to discuss issues that are important to you as gay folk, of course, go ahead. The serious posters can do this without being entangled with a troll.
Remember that Congress has exempted themselves, their wives and their children from this health care bill. My only question is "Why?"
It was Is Nemeskal who wrote, "I'm done with you and the Brown Brigade."
Permalink Reply by Ellen Bullock on January 16, 2010 at 12:25am
Permalink Reply by Don McDougall on January 16, 2010 at 12:29am Your gay friends should fully support this guy, while his personal views are for traditional marraige, he also CLEARLY STATES that the individual States should be the engine of change. Many local gays and lesbians are in fact liberal first and gay 2nd. They use the specious claims of persicution to promote a LIBERAL agenda. They use being gay as a tool to promote their views. As one activist told me. "I am a democrat 1st, and always will be. Being gay is one of the tool I use to promote the party and support Barak Obama.."
p.s. If you have to defend your position to your friend, and they do not respect you for who you are may I suggest you find a better class of friend.
© 2013